Presentation by Ms. Hilde F. Johnson, Minister of International Development
to Corps Consulaire de Norvege, Oslo, 8 March 2003

Honorary Consuls,
Excellencies,
Distinguished members of the diplomatic corps,
Ladies and gentlemen,

It is a pleasure for me to be addressing this prominent gathering of honorary consuls. Your work helps to make Norway an attractive partner abroad, and this is very much appreciated. Through your efforts in consular matters and in promoting business relations, you are building a bridge between Norway and the countries you represent, which facilitates co-operation in a wide range of fields.

I am also happy to see so many resident ambassadors here today.

(Iraq, Afghanistan, Sudan)

I have been invited to talk to you about issues that are high on my agenda, and I will begin with the crisis that the whole world is following from day to day. The situation in Iraq is extremely serious.

We are strongly hoping that war can be avoided, but I would like to state very clearly that the main responsibility for a peaceful solution lies with Saddam Hussein. The situation we are facing has its roots in the aggressive policy Iraq has been pursuing for more than a decade.

Peace is still possible, provided Saddam Hussein immediately starts respecting, abiding by and implementing all the relevant Security Council resolutions. Although some progress has been made, it is not clear that Iraq cooperates actively and unconditionally with the weapons inspectors.

The weapons inspectors should be given the possibility to continue their work as long as it is meaningful.

Norway is committed to finding a peaceful solution to the crisis. Military action against Iraq can only be justified if all peaceful avenues have been sufficiently explored and, if such action seems unavoidable, it must be given legitimacy by a new Security Council resolution.

The humanitarian situation in Iraq is very serious. More than 60 per cent of the population depend on food assistance from the UN. A war will bring additional suffering to the Iraqi people, who have endured hardship under Saddam Hussein far too long.

The Iraqi regime has one of the worst human rights records of any government in power today. The Iraqi people deserve a better government. A democratic Iraq is, of course, a vision we subscribe to. The key to such a development should be based on the efforts of the Iraqi people themselves.

More than a year has passed since the fall of the Taliban regime in Afghanistan and the signing of the Bonn Agreement. Much has been achieved, but there are still a lot of challenges ahead. In order to ensure peace and stability in the country, it is important that the political process brings about free and fair elections in June 2004, in accordance with the Bonn Agreement.

However, the security situation continues to be precarious. It is crucial that factional leaders and warlords are brought under the control of the central government. The implementation of reforms in the security sector is vital for sustainable political and economic development.

Time has come for the Afghanistan Transitional Authority to take the full lead in the recovery and reconstruction efforts. The Afghans themselves will be in charge of donor co-ordination through a Consultative Group mechanism. Now it is crunch time for the donor community. We must all deliver.

Norway will be allocating NOK 375 million, or approximately USD 52 million, to Afghanistan in 2003, and we are redirecting the focus of our efforts from humanitarian to transitional and longer-term development assistance. Depending on Afghan priorities and those of other donors, we plan to support capacity building in the public administration, the education sector, and reintegration of refugees. We will also support democracy and human rights in all sectors.

I have just returned from a visit to Kenya and Sudan, and I am pleased to be able to say that both visits gave grounds for optimism. It was encouraging to meet the newly elected government of Kenya and learn more about its ambitious agenda for fighting corruption and rebuilding the economy. I am also pleased that the bilateral relations between our two countries are back to normal.

In Sudan, I had the pleasant task of passing on a message from Prime Minister Bondevik to President al-Bashir announcing that we will be upgrading our bilateral relations. It is no secret that Sudan holds a special place on my agenda. I was very moved by the situation in this war-torn country when I first went there in 1998. Since then, Norway has been actively pursuing peace through close contacts with the parties, the IGAD negotiating team and other international observers. At my meetings with them the SPLM leader, Dr. John Garang, and his associates in Nairobi, and President al-Bashir in Khartoum confirmed their strong determination to continue the search for peace and to pursue the IGAD-led peace talks to a successful conclusion. I am pleased to note that the international community is united in its support for the efforts being made by the parties and by IGAD. Hopefully, we will soon be able to step up our joint assistance to a united Sudan at peace with itself and with equal opportunities for all.

(Poverty, MDGs, framework conditions)

President Jimmy Carter reminded the world from the Nobel podium that the gap between rich and poor is widening. He said, rightly, that this growing chasm is the single most important challenge of our time. Some simple facts illustrate this chasm all too clearly:

1.2 billion people live on less than a dollar a day.

The richest 1 per cent of the world population earns as much per year as the poorest 57 per cent.

1.6 billion people have no access to electricity. Eighty per cent of these live in Africa and India.

At the current rate of progress it will take 130 years to eradicate hunger in the world.

The average Norwegian man can expect to live until he is 75 years old. The average man living in Mozambique or Angola can expect to live until he is 38 years old.

But in spite of these deplorable facts, the situation is not entirely black. A common global understanding of the gravity of the situation has finally been achieved, in the form of the Millennium Development Goals.

The MDGs state that, by 2015, the proportion of people living in extreme poverty and hunger and the proportion lacking clean drinking water must be halved. The ratio of children dying before the age of five must be reduced by two-thirds. The ratio of deaths among women giving birth must be reduced by 75 per cent. The spread of HIV/AIDS must be reversed. All children, girls as well as boys, must be offered primary education.

Finally there is a concrete plan outlining how to fight poverty - the most important challenge of our time. The MDGs have placed the interests of the poor and underprivileged at the top of the international political agenda. Heads of state, including the G8 leaders, cite them frequently, and are agreed that poverty is the greatest scourge of our time. They are saying that they will combat it by co-operation and by financial assistance. This, ladies and gentlemen, is a major breakthrough in international politics.

To achieve the MDGs and win the war on poverty, changes must be made and resources mobilised in at least four areas simultaneously.

Firstly, international framework conditions for debt reduction, trade and investment must be improved and made more supportive of the MDGs. We must ensure consistency and coherence between the goals the international community has set itself and the framework that same community is putting in place to achieve them. In the long run fair international framework conditions are crucial for ensuring sustainable development and freedom from poverty.

Secondly, the poor countries themselves need to assign priorities, draw up strategies, invest in human resources and implement poverty-oriented policies. Good governance, democracy and human rights must be promoted in order to combat poverty and make development sustainable. ThisThese are also preconditions to attract investments and to make development assistance constructive. It is a fact that development assistance is most efficient in countries with good governance.

Thirdly, ODA should be increased considerably. It actually needs to be doubled if we are to reach the MDGs. We also need to get more poverty reduction out of every dollar or krone. To achieve this we must improve our own ability to deliver assistance efficiently. We need more and better aid to put it bluntly.

Fourthly, we must make a great effort to mobilise the private sector and the resources of civil society for the achievement of the MDGs. There is a lot of unexploited potential in these sectors. Entrepreneurs and agents of change must be given better framework conditions, and NGOs and the media must be strengthened so that they can fulfil their roles as watchdogs in democratic societies.

(The MDGs and the Norwegian action plan to combat poverty)

In March last year the Norwegian Government launched an action plan to combat poverty in the South. The plan takes the MDGs as its main point of departure and outlines how Norway will contribute to their achievement.

The plan emphasises the close relationship between development assistance policy and policies in other areas such as debt, trade, investment, agriculture, the environment and energy. Policies in these areas can be seen as development policies because they influence the situation of poor people in poor countries. Thus, in order to effectively alleviate poverty in the South, our national policies must form a coherent whole.

The action plan maintains that human rights must continue to be an integral part of Norwegian development policy in bilateral and multilateral fora. This is because the realisation of fundamental human rights is both an important goal in itself and because the fulfilment of these rights liberates forces that create and stimulate development. Thus realising human rights is a vital part of the development process itself.

The right to education and expression are human rights and they should be promoted for precisely this reason. At the same time the realisation of these rights liberates forces that create and stimulate development.

The action plan also stresses that capacity building for good governance will continue to be one of the most important areas for Norwegian development co-operation. In this connection the situation in our main partner countries is being assessed with a view to establishing a better basis for further assistance. We are also reviewing our policies in a number of areas to make them more coherent and supportive of the MDGs. Moreover, we are working to improve international framework conditions for developing countries as regards investment and trade. Finally, we are exploring the possibilities for supporting the development of a free press and pluralistic organisations in developing countries.

As today is 8 March, the international women’s day, it is an appropriate occasion to point out that women constitute a disproportionately large part of the world’s poor population. In many countries women are the heads of households. Women grow food for their families and play a pivotal role in the development processes. They run small businesses; they ensure that children get education and health care. This means that investing in women’s health and education and involving them in the productive sector is a particularly cost-effective way to promote development. Assisting women not only improves their social status and living conditions, it also improves that of their families. We urgently need to recognise women as the invaluable development resource they are, or could be if given the chance. Respecting the rights of women and promoting their active participation in political and economic life is absolutely essential for achieving sustainable development.

The Norwegian government has pledged to increase its development assistance to 1 per cent of GNI by 2005. The budget for 2003 shows that we are moving steadily towards this goal, and we now stand at 0.93 per cent. We would encourage all other industrial countries to follow this example.

(Peace-building, GAP, terrorism)

A range of global conferences, from Rio in 1992 to Johannesburg in 2002, have highlighted the crucial links between three key UN goals: peace, sustainable development and human rights. This is certainly encouraging, but there is still a wide gap between rhetoric and reality, between promises and results on the ground. Peace is the major precondition for development. Without peace and stability, our fight against poverty is doomed to fail. Yet peace and human security remain an elusive proposition for far too many people.

Mass violence is usually a result of deliberate political decisions by leaders. Internal conflicts revolve around relations of power. They are often based on a perception of gross injustice or violations of rights. Violent conflicts are often protracted, persistent and difficult to resolve. They also have far-reaching consequences. About 6 million people were killed in intra-state conflicts during the 1990s. Violence affects the civilian population and hits the weakest groups hardest. Millions of adults and children are left with physical and psychological wounds after traumatic experiences. An estimated 300 000 children are soldiers, involved in civil wars. Nearly 40 million people have become refugees and internally displaced as a result of civil wars. Eighty per cent of them are women and children.

Such conflicts, which affect so many thousands and millions of people, must be given due attention wherever they occur in the world. Although the media tend to deal with only one conflict at a time, the international community has an obligation to address human suffering everywhere.

One way of doing this is by mounting massive international humanitarian relief operations. These are commendable and, I would say, mandatory as an expression of solidarity. They save lives, relieve immediate suffering, and protect innocent people from harm. They do not, however, address the underlying structural causes of conflict. They do not prevent conflicts from breaking out again. And they divert resources from long-term sustainable development programmes.

Preventing the conflict from arising in the first place is, of course, preferable to healing the wounds, applying a cure and repairing the damage. The challenge for the international community is to be able to identify situations with a potential for conflict and to prevent them from breaking out or, in post-conflict situations, from re-occurring.

In addition to helping to prevent conflicts, the international community can assist in conflict resolution or, as I prefer to call it, peacemaking. The challenge is to facilitate political negotiations that will result in cease-fire agreements and peace accords. Norway has had the honour to be invited by the parties concerned to facilitate a number of peacemaking processes.

But getting the parties to the negotiating table and into a situation where they dare to opt for peace is the spectacular part of the story. The less exciting part is what must come afterwards in order to consolidate peace – namely peace-building by addressing social and economic development as well as political and security issues. I could speak for hours about the various aspects of peace-building, but time is short and I must move on.

Terrorism is a particularly serious form of violence with global implications. The possibility of terrorists gaining access to and using weapons of mass destruction is one of the most fundamental threats to our society, and should in itself be more than enough to ensure that all countries co-ordinate their efforts not only to fight terrorism, but also to prevent it.

The UN plays a key role in fighting and preventing terrorism. But the whole of the international community must work together in order to succeed, and in this endeavour it is vital to support the UN. Norway is doing its share and we will continue our fight against terrorism, both in military terms and in other ways, for instance through our efforts in Afghanistan. But we are also trying to prevent terrorism by combating the fundamental causes. And in this connection I would like to return to the three key UN goals: sustainable development, respect for human rights and the promotion of peace. Unless we strive to reach these goals I am afraid our joint fight against terrorism will in the long run be a futile one.

(Private sector development, gender)

Private sector development is crucial for ensuring economic growth and reducing poverty. However, economic growth alone is not sufficient to combat poverty. Growth in GDP must be accompanied by policies to promote equitable social distribution.

Establishing favourable conditions for the private sector is a national responsibility. It needs a comprehensive approach that addresses issues at all levels, from micro to macro, in the public and in the private sector, at the national and at the international level. Special focus must be given to women and gender mainstreaming. Private sector development measures have proved particularly suitable for strengthening the position of women in society. This includes improving institutional frameworks and infrastructure.

We are currently strengthening our focus on trade and private sector development. Country reviews have recently been carried out in our main partner countries to identify opportunities for Norwegian support for developing the private sector and stimulating economic growth, and the obstacles that must be overcome. The reviews indicate that our future focus should be on framework conditions, including legal and regulatory frameworks, institution building and social and physical infrastructure. Government and private sector and private-private partnerships will continue to be encouraged and strengthened. We have increased the resource base in NORFUND, the Norwegian Investment Fund for Developing Countries, which provides risk sharing and investment for the development of businesses and private enterprises in developing countries.

Trade is an important vehicle for economic growth and poverty alleviation – and a central element in our action plan for combating poverty. Clearly, we cannot achieve systematic and sustained poverty reduction without more trade and economic growth in the poorest countries. Measures for promoting trade must be included in developing countries’ own development strategies as well as in co-operation agreements with development partners.

The Doha Development Agenda of the WTOaims to improve market access for developing countries and enable them to participate more actively in the globalised world market. Uniform, multilateral rules are necessary to ensure a harmonised and predictable trading framework for all partners, and in particular for developing countries.

Improved market access for developing country products, in both developed and developing markets, is important for sustained economic growth and poverty reduction. Tariff reductions on a most favoured nation basis in the WTO will provide predictable market access for all countries. In addition the Generalised System of Preferences provides preferential access to developed country’s markets for many developing countries, in particular the least developed.

Norway granted duty- and quota-free access to the Norwegian market for the least developed countries as of 1 July last year. We are now providing increased technical assistance in order to build capacity and competence in these countries so that they can benefit from the new market opportunities in Norway and elsewhere.

Norway will also consider further improvements in market access for products of particular interest to developing countries – in particular agricultural products and textiles – through the WTO and the Generalised System of Preferences.

(WSSD follow-up)

In 2002 we witnessed a stronger commitment to North-South partnership than we have seen for more than a decade.

The Monterrey Consensus from the Financing for Development Conference, which took place year ago, showed that rich countries have now understood the importance of reducing and preferably eradicating poverty for global security and economic and social development. At Monterrey both the EU and the US signalled that they had concrete plans for stepping up their assistance. Other countries are now following a similar trend. Hopefully, the steady decline in the volume of development assistance has been reversed.

Norway also had high ambitions for the Johannesburg Summit. We wanted to see an action-oriented plan with time-bound targets and poverty eradication as the overriding goal. We hoped to go to the Summit riding on a wave of international optimism. However, the international climate during those hectic months was not promising.The results of the summit fall short of what is needed to meet the challenges posed by environmental issues and poverty eradication. Nevertheless, given the complexity of the issues and the difficulties encountered during the negotiations, the results were better than we had feared.

In the long term, the significance of the Johannesburg Summit will depend on how it is followed up. Norway is prepared to assume its share of responsibility. We must ensure that the Summit is followed up by concrete action to reduce poverty, change production and consumption patterns, and improve the management of natural resources. We cannot allow the process to lose momentum.

(It does not pay to ignore poverty and suppression.)

It is in everyone’s interest to fight poverty and to promote sustainable development, respect for human rights and durable peace. Secretary General Kofi Annan has made this point very eloquently:

"Either we help the outsiders in a lobalised world out of a sense of moral obligation and enlightened self-interest, or we will find ourselves compelled to do so tomorrow, when their problems become our problems in a world without walls."

In conclusion, I would stress that global challenges require global solutions and global efforts. There is no alternative to strengthening multilateralism. The UN is the only truly global forum for achieving a common, overarching vision. We must support the UN, we must help it to become more efficient and we must make sure that it can serve as the focal point of our efforts to improve our common future.

Thank you for your attention.